Dr Web questions

[n8chavez]

I have Dr Web 4.33.2 installed. I think that is going to be my main AV from now on. And I think I've having an resource useage issue with it. It seems to be using around 53 meg. I have been using the doc for years now and I have never experienced this, until recently. Maybe there is something wrong with a recent update. Has anyone else had this happen before? Should I contact support?

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/8852/screenshot721200692608pmwo2.th.png (http://img84.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screenshot721200692608pmwo2.png)

[Blackcat]

-{ Quote: "I think that is going to be my main AV from now on. " }-
Are you sure about this?
-{ Quote: " And I think I've having an resource useage issue with it. Should I contact support?" }-
After your previous experience definitely not ::) :o :D
-{ Quote: " I have contacted support. We went back and forth and finally they told me that there was nothing they could do about it, after two weeks or so. I let them know that if this is the case I would need a refund for Dr Web as i cannot use it and need to look elsewhere for protection. This problem made my system unuseable. I have not heard anything back after that. It has been five days.

I am very unhappy at Dr Web support and can no longer recommend it to anyone who comes in to my shop. I cannot recomend something that they might have problem with, as I have. Dr Web support seems useless." }-

[n8chavez]

-{ Quote: "Are you sure about this? " }-

This is a little strange I have to say; seeing you at both forums. And I have to say you are taking this suprisingly well. I half expected you to say "et tu n8chavez." But sadly I have never been able to fix the context menu problems. The mods at the VBA32 forum don't seem to understand that I cannot do any steps to recreate the issue. That and the fact that my licence ends in september made Dr Web an easy choice. VBA32 I don't think it quite ready yet; no archive scanning (a la Dr Web or NOD32), scheduler, and they have real problems with the RTM. I'm a college student and money is, well valuable.

-{ Quote: " After your previous experience definitely not ::) :o :D" }-

Well it is true that I have not had a very good experience with them this one time. And since I won't be given a refund...done deal doc. But I thought it might be worth taking to support because it might benefit other users, if indeed this is an actual confirmable bug.

[bellgamin]

Oh my, n8, the doctor on your computer got one beeeg bambucha! My doc's bambucha is many centimeters shorter than your doc's. :blink:

See pretty picture below.

[Blackcat]

-{ Quote: "I have Dr Web 4.33.2 installed. And I think I've having an resource useage issue with it. It seems to be using around 53 meg. I have been using the doc for years now and I have never experienced this, until recently. Has anyone else had this happen before? Should I contact support?]" }-
The usual low VM usage here; even when I loaded up SpiderMail, the total memory usage was only 15MB and SpIDerMail accounted for 10MB!

Had you just carried out a memory/on-demand scan when you noticed these high figures and were your VM figures also on the high side?

This is because the "memory" does apparently jump a lot after these scans but the actual VM results do actually stay the same. (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=52669&highlight=DrWeb)

Results shown on a Win XP SP2 system.

[n8chavez]

-{ Quote: "Oh my, n8, the doctor on your computer got one beeeg bambucha! My doc's bambucha is many centimeters shorter than your doc's. :blink:

See pretty picture below." }-

Uh...what?

I woke up this morning after having ran a complete system scan during the night...this is what I was. I still see high resource useage even after the scan has long since been completed

[n8chavez]

Then I restarted my system and this is what my resource useage looks like. Now granted after a reboot everything is going to be "in shape" understandably, but I just wanted to show you the drastic differences. Is this normal?

Maybe I am thinking about this wrong. After looking at the total memory useagre number on the bottom of the last two images, I think I need to have something clarified for me or my mistake pointed out. If I were to add the all the numbers in the Mem Useage collumn shouldn't I end up with th commit charge number? If that is the case then why is there only a 40 meg difference between the two commit charge numbers, when clearly the respective collumns wouldn't add up that way?

[dan_maran]

-{ Quote: " The mods at the VBA32 forum don't seem to understand that I cannot do any steps to recreate the issue. That and the fact that my licence ends in september made Dr Web an easy choice. VBA32 I don't think it quite ready yet; no archive scanning (a la Dr Web or NOD32), scheduler, and they have real problems with the RTM." }-

Archive scanning is cominhg in VBA32, this has been stated many times. :)
3.11.1 alpha is available now, I am running and it is hell of alot quicker, the "process only new files" option seems to be fixed. And also the system is back to a 3.10 feel to is in response time.

Sorry O/T, but was worth mentioning, IMO
The good Dr. has lost a bit of respect from me for the recent "changes" they have made to the software, and the like.

[n8chavez]

-{ Quote: " Sorry O/T, but was worth mentioning, IMO
The good Dr. has lost a bit of respect from me for the recent "changes" they have made to the software, and the like." }-

Could you PM me with the details? I am interested in what you think of Dr Web, or more importantly, why they have lost your respect. But this doesn't seem like the appropraite thread.

[Don Pelotas]

-{ Quote: "But this doesn't seem like the appropraite thread." }-
No, it doesn't and furthermore what you have seen is not uncommon, Ewido will do the same after a scan.

[dan_maran]

-{ Quote: "Could you PM me with the details? I am interested in what you think of Dr Web, or more importantly, why they have lost your respect. But this doesn't seem like the appropraite thread." }-
Agreed and PM sent :)
Please don't anyone read into my comments on Dr. Web, they are soley my own and should be taken with a grain of salt.

[Blackcat]

-{ Quote: "Then I restarted my system and this is what my resource useage looks like. Now granted after a reboot everything is going to be "in shape" understandably, but I just wanted to show you the drastic differences. Is this normal?" }-
If you read my previous post carefully, you will see that this apparent "high" memory usage is normally seen after a memory scan with Dr Web.
-{ Quote: " No, this phenomena is nothing new for Dr Web. Further, it only seems that loads of memory is being used because of the way Windows polls memory usage and because of the way Dr Web scans memory. It appears to me (and I'm no expert) that when Dr Web momentarily "lifts" the program from memory for scanning and then replaces it, the memory usage just gets multiplied by what was already there before being scanned by Dr Web. So, basically, the memory usage column is incorrect after running the memory scan.
Anyway, if your task manager doesn't show a column for "VM Size" (and I don't think it does by default) then, in Task Manager, go to: View>> Select Columns >> and put a check mark in the option for Virtual Memory Size. Now when you run the Dr Web scanner you can monitor vitual memory size and you will see that it doesn't change. VM Size is what you want to be concerned with. If when running the memory scanner the VM Size column was to do somersaults like memory usage then, yes, Dr Web would be a resource hog.

For the record: Dr Web claims this is a Windows issue and not the memory scanner. I tend to agree with them." }-